Turkey and Kurds, Syria and Kurds, Iraq and Kurds, Iran and Kurds.
Lebanon i’d say is a shared blame of UK and France.
Ireland proper and Northern Ireland
Sudan, Somalia, Lybia
Comment on British Slander. :)
MBM@lemmings.world 3 weeks ago
Israel+Palestine, Pakistan+India+Bangladesh, any more I’m forgetting?
Saleh@feddit.org 3 weeks ago
decipher_jeanne@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Okay I am defending the British a little here. Yes the issues would have never happened if they hadn’t colonized India to begin with. But. It’s more nuanced.
Pakistan wanted to not be a part of India with Muhammad Ali Jinnah pushing the two nations theory. The reverse was less true but the Indian leadership under Nehru reluctantly agreed to the split. That’s despite the British best effort to meditate because in places like Kashmir and Bangladesh the separation would be hard and economicly ruinous for the area.
Viceroy Mountbatten rushed the exit out of india. And the Radcliffe line (the hastly drawn border between the two sides) was a complete mess but also a result of being rushed in 5 weeks. Both this led to a horrible refugee crisis/mutual genocide. But a longer British stay would have been difficult with all sides pushing for their exit and fear of mutiny in the army.
Bangladesh genocide is an entire different can of worms that I am less familiar with so no comment here.
Samskara@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
As we all know wars, conflicts, conquest, exploitation, and oppression were totally unknown to the rest of the world before Europeans exported them worldwide. Coincidentally Europeans also removed all supplies of agency from the rest of humanity and hoarded it in the imperial core.
decipher_jeanne@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Wait am I coming off as sea-lioning?
decipher_jeanne@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Hi. Sorry if this didn’t come across, but my point was specifically that the local independent movement had agency and it wasn’t just a top-down colonial mismanagement. The Empire can obviously take a large part of the blame here for being here to begin with and having a rushed exit. But the conflicting Pakistani and Indian view had a lot of influence in the resulting chaotic border.
it was Hindu, Sikh and Muslim massacring each others as millions moved across the border. But it was an independence planed and executed in less than 6 months, amidst existing religious tension, that made a tense situation worse by forcing a mass emigration on short notice. To the point people were staving on the road and supplies had to be parachuted to the columns of migrants.
As for my invitation to debate the impact of the British exit of India, it is not meant to carry an opinion but to open discussion. I am less knowledgeable about the subject, but my opinion is that even if good border had been drawn the Kashmir would have ever been contentious and conflict would have flared there. But again, open to debate.
I hope this clears things up.
couldhavebeenyou@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
North America?
captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
The present US/Mexico border was set by the treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo AFAIK, If any of Mexico’s southern border is an English speaker’s fault I’m unaware of it, I suppose Canada was still pretty much a British crown colony when most of the US/CA border was hashed out, but except for Demented Child Rapist In Chief nobody contests that border.
Samskara@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Yes, times were so much better when the Ottoman Empire ruled and oppressed the Middle East and beyond. Truly an empire of peace.
The Mughals were also welcomed in India as friendly visitors, as we all know.
answersplease77@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
are you talking british colonism from 17th century until the collapse of the othman empire??
You’re missing about maybe 50 more countries I’d say.
grue@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Africa.
dabaldeagul@feddit.nl 3 weeks ago
Wasn’t that Germany? They decided to be a middleman deciding which territories should belong to who, right?